Your friend Jim George thinks you'd be a great addition to Ricochet, so we'd like to offer you a special deal: You can become a member for no initial charge for one month!
Ricochet is a community of like-minded people who enjoy writing about and discussing politics (usually of the center-right nature), culture, sports, history, and just about every other topic under the sun in a fully moderated environment. We’re so sure you’ll like Ricochet, we’ll let you join and get your first month for free. Kick the tires: read the always eclectic member feed, write some posts, join discussions, participate in a live chat or two, and listen to a few of our over 50 (free) podcasts on every conceivable topic, hosted by some of the biggest names on the right, for 30 days on us. We’re confident you’re gonna love it.
Get real. Of course not.
For they are all, all honorable men. Just ask @garyrobbins. He will tell you what impeccable characters all of these folks have. He is earnestly defending Biden on the grounds of character.
A tweet made in response to Steve Guest:
That responding tweet linked to a Politico article containing the following:
Yet another unnamed former senior official expresses an opinion. Why is the source of this quote anonymous? It’s not to protect his or her job; the individual doesn’t work there anymore. It is only an opinion. Why the secrecy?
After he was doxxed, you wouldn’t want right wing nut jobs going to his house at night and keeping him up.
If I understand this letter correctly (and I probably don’t), Ratcliffe is blaming it all on the Russians?!
Here is some more context…
I don’t see the significance of this disclosure. It says the IC can’t tell the accuracy of the report, and that it may be exaggeration or fabrication.
Am I missing something?
I agree. Not much substance to it. Could be something. Could be nothing.
The FBI investigated Trump on “evidence” even flimsier than that which they had obtained on Clinton. They never spent any time on the Clinton angle.
Tyler O’Neil at PJMedia does a good job of breaking it down.
That is completely irrelevant.
What Graham is saying is that Trump was investigated on the basis of information from a suspect Russian source. This letter revealed that a suspect Russian source claimed Hillary Clinton approved the plan to tie Trump with Russia as an effort at starting a scandal.
So the IC has two pieces of suspect information (well, probably many more, but for this illustration). They take one and use it to obtain wiretaps while sheltering the source. The other piece of information apparently warranted no investigation by the IC as it was at the time.
In other words, no one thought it worthwhile to investigate whether the whole thing was cooked up by the Clinton campaign, which might have been prudent if the intelligence community wanted to know whether the Trump-Russia link was real and or not. The timeline suggests that senior administration officials knew the veracity of the link was based on a compromised source, but they directed the investigation into Trump to proceed anyway.
Tell me where I got it wrong.
Wasn’t the letter to Graham, rather than from Graham?
This proves that Hillary, Brennan, and 0bama knew and approved the Russia collusion hoax, I believe days before the Russia Investigation was opened on George Papadopoulos, which the FBI says was the start date of the investigation.
I love the alteration to the “Caldecott” medal in the corner.
Yes, but he shared the letter and said it represents a double standard by the DOJ et al. They took one piece of questionable information and helped cook it up into a big (at least according to the media) scandal, and ignored the other, similarly questionable information, which pointed at the whole thing being a fabrication.
How? The Russia collusion hoax was not an investigation of this allegation about Clinton. It was an investigation of Trump.
If you read the article, you will see that
That is completely irrelevant.
Oh my …
Which part?
Lyndsey Graham shared the letter on the Senate Judiciary Committee’s site. There was a brief take on it and a statement of his wanting to question James Comey about it. It is not linked here, but in another post on the same topic.
The delusion is strong in that one:
Angela Davis has endorsed Biden, too:
And why not? She’s an unrepentant Communist, whose teachers pioneered the identity politics version of Marxism–which has assimilated and superceded the old solely economic class based version–as the way to bring the Revolution to the United States.
She sees Biden as the fastest way for the “trained Marxists” violently pushing the “evolving anti-racist movement” to advance installing the intersectionalist cult in Washington.
Boring. Oh, yes. A “return to normalcy.” You bet.
Or: Starting no later than 2012, Obama began using the intelligence community to spy on his political enemies. One side benefit for him and the yet unknown (though Hillary had to be on the list) Democrat who would try to succeed Obama was that this would produce complicit intelligence officials with a strong self interest in defeating any Republican in 2016 (except perhaps one who was him/herself compromised by the conspirators.) Flynn, being on Obama’s enemies list over the Iran deal, was targeted before his association with the Trump campaign began.
As part of her bid to succed Obama, Hillary focus grouped her negatives. Russia related corruption was high on the list. Russia collusion was a preemptive strike to throw Russian stink onto Trump; any reminder of Uranium One, Skolkovo, the Clinton Foundation’s Russian money and so on would be dismissed with the help of the presstitutes as “old news” while the Trump Russia hoax was heavily promoted.
What allegation against Clinton?
The memo starts off referring to Crossfire Hurricane. This was not an investigation of Clinton. It was conceived by a Russian, thought out by Clinton Brennan and approved by 0bama (and others) and implemented by Comey and Strzok.
This proves that Crossfire hurricane was the doing of — was inspired, cleared and begun under the encouraging eyes of — Hillary, Brennan, Obama, days before (iirc) the sworn start date of the investigation. That means they all had knowledge of and approved of and oversaw the illegal acts that were to be carried out under the investigation.
One relevant dimension is timing. In general, this was fairly early. That is very different, for example, from hypothetical 2018 intelligence.
Imagine we found an October 1963 intelligence report about Rafael Cruz conspiring with Lee Harvey Oswald to assassinate Kennedy! Even a December 1963 report would now be noteworthy.
Another dimension is the effect on the original US recipients of the intelligence. This would have given them a reason to suspect the subsequent Hilary-sourced intelligence they received.
A more difficult dimension is the state of mind of the source. We don’t know the source or the context. Was this signals intelligence? Did this reflect a Ruskie report of Hilary pulling an Obama by communicating to the Russians that she would have more flexibility after the election but, until then, would be using them as a scapegoat?
Brian,
Will the arrests involve smashing into someone’s home at 4 am in the morning? I hope there will be video.
Regards,
Jim
He read it aloud to Comey this morning, and questioned Comey about it. Comey said he didn’t know anything about it. Graham pointed out how incredible that is, because that intelligence was sent to him.
So did Richard Spencer.